Too many programs?

[Adam638]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm trying to figure out how many programs I should be applying to. Given that each program after 30 is $25, I think I may be putting myself in some serious debt right off the start. I've got my list at 80 programs right now. I'm wondering if you feel this is overkill and if so how many programs would you apply to?

Want to match midwest. Not interested in east and west coast programs.

Step 1 - 235
State school
Top 1/3 of class
Good 3rd year grades
Great LORs
4th year research in radiology


Any advice would be great. I have a family and extra $ for interviewing wouldn't hurt.........

 

[Shifty B]

If you are not interested in east coast or west coast, it should be easy to whittle it down. I don't think there are 80 programs in the midwest. If you seriously wouldn't go there, then seriously don't apply.

 

[cowme]

I'm trying to figure out how many programs I should be applying to. Given that each program after 30 is $25, I think I may be putting myself in some serious debt right off the start. I've got my list at 80 programs right now. I'm wondering if you feel this is overkill and if so how many programs would you apply to?

Want to match midwest. Not interested in east and west coast programs.

Step 1 - 235
State school
Top 1/3 of class
Good 3rd year grades
Great LORs
4th year research in radiology


Any advice would be great. I have a family and extra $ for interviewing wouldn't hurt.........

Apply to any, and I mean ANY program you are willing to go to. If you get offered 40 interviews, awesome, just cancel 25 of em. If you only get offered 10, you will be happy you applied to a lot. Only you can figure how many are too many. I applied to 40 personally, but would have gladly applied to 80 if there were 80 programs I liked (and if I wasn't geographically limited).

 

[NAGNAM]

80 may seem like a lot, but it's exponentially better than applying to 40 this year and having to apply to another 40 next year. It's just a drop in the bucket of debt, and if you end up overbooking stuff you can easily cancel it. too many interviews is a problem a llot of people would kill to have, so i don't think 80 is too much if that's what you're at now

 

[colbgw02]

That's too many for someone only looking in the Midwest. I was told to apply broadly by an overly cautious advisor, and her magic number was 40. The others are right though - the application costs should be way down on the list of reasons to apply/not apply to a program.

 

[BenFelson]

Due to the shortage of employment for the newly trained radiologists, a few residency programs went unfilled. Fellowship is almost required for good jobs. A few are doing second fellowship to increase marketability. Everyday, programs are losing residents at all levels.
So your chance of getting into a residency is higher, keeping in mind that the prevailing lifestyle and private practice income have gotten worse.
If you still want Radiology, more power to you!
The ship in sinking, but we are glad to have you on board.

 

[RisingSun]

Disregard the above post.

I think that 80 is overkill. Half that many may be a more appropriate number, particularly given that you are interested in staying in the midwest, which generally is less competitive than the coasts.

Talk with a school adviser to nail down the exact programs you will apply to, but I would recommend that with your stats that you have 10 or so top programs in the midwest, 20 or so solid academic/community programs, and maybe 10ish less competitive places. I would guess that you will get interviews at half of the places that you apply, maybe a little bit less. Shoot for 15 interviews - anything more is an unnecessary expense and low yield.

Good luck!

 

[Gryphes]

Due to the shortage of employment for the newly trained radiologists, a few residency programs went unfilled. Fellowship is almost required for good jobs. A few are doing second fellowship to increase marketability. Everyday, programs are losing residents at all levels.
So your chance of getting into a residency is higher, keeping in mind that the prevailing lifestyle and private practice income have gotten worse.
If you still want Radiology, more power to you!
The ship in sinking, but we are glad to have you on board.

Is this a half-bitter, baked joke? We all know the lifestyle/pay is getting worse (and it may be cyclical, or may not), but the shortage of employment sounds a bit different from what I heard. Are you saying that there is a true-broad job shortage for graduating Radiologists? I thought for the most part, these "unemployed" radiologists are staying so because they are restricting the locations by the preference.

 

[NAGNAM]

Disregard the above post.

I think that 80 is overkill. Half that many may be a more appropriate number, particularly given that you are interested in staying in the midwest, which generally is less competitive than the coasts.

Talk with a school adviser to nail down the exact programs you will apply to, but I would recommend that with your stats that you have 10 or so top programs in the midwest, 20 or so solid academic/community programs, and maybe 10ish less competitive places. I would guess that you will get interviews at half of the places that you apply, maybe a little bit less. Shoot for 15 interviews - anything more is an unnecessary expense and low yield.

Good luck!

80 is definitely a LOT of programs to apply to. That being said, OP has a slightly lower than avg board score (of course a 235 will absolutely NOT preclude one from radiology).

40-45 programs is probably appropriate and what most applicants with similar accolades and residency pursuits would apply to. However, if you're neurotic and want to be safe, I don't think 80 is absurd. It is possible to get very unlucky in the match process (you just happen to be at the top of a ton of wait lists, you end up ranked highly by programs but just shy of high enough to match)-- I saw this happen with a classmate of mine who was quite qualified for their field.

Of course, this is out of a class of ~125 and she is the only one who I think had genuine bad luck in the match. I'm just saying that every year, there are a handful of people who are qualified, interview well, and still don't match. It's just awful, **** luck. Applying to more programs can help lower the risk of what is otherwise a statistical anomaly.

/ramble

 

[cowme]

Is this a half-bitter, baked joke? We all know the lifestyle/pay is getting worse (and it may be cyclical, or may not), but the shortage of employment sounds a bit different from what I heard. Are you saying that there is a true-broad job shortage for graduating Radiologists? I thought for the most part, these "unemployed" radiologists are staying so because they are restricting the locations by the preference.

Gryphes, BenFelson is a troll, FWIW. He just posted (with the same name) on auntminnie asking 1) if radiology is becoming less competitive and 2) to list all 15 specialties in order of competitiveness

 

[NAGNAM]

Gryphes, BenFelson is a troll, FWIW. He just posted (with the same name) on auntminnie asking 1) if radiology is becoming less competitive and 2) to list all 15 specialties in order of competitiveness

Don't think it's the same guy. The one here is just making the common claims-- whether correct or not, it's certainly a prevalent viewpoint in the field-- that rads is becoming a less desirable field (though, let's be honest, it could be 90% less desirable and still beat doing IM). The one on AM just seems like an idiot.

BenFelson seems like an obvious username for someone on a rads board to use.